As ThinkProgress has documented, President Bush is pushing an array of 11th hour regulations in his final months. In a USA Today op-ed today, White House Deputy Press Secretary Tony Fratto defends the practice, claiming that the “midnight” regulations are, in fact, “transparent” and “responsible”:

The record will show a slight increase, but a relatively steady pace in the number of regulations finalized during the fall of this year, the overwhelming majority of which are routine and unremarkable. And instead of a spike of late regulations at the end, we expect a drop-off in the last weeks.

These are not “midnight regulations” or “rushed regulations.” There will be no surprises: The vast majority of regulations finalized in these last months will have been published for public review and comment since June 1, more than six months before the end of the president’s term.

Bush’s last-minute regulations are hardly “unremarkable.” Rather, they are ideologically-driven, and will weaken health care, workers rights, and degrade the environment. Bush still plans on releasing some 20 “highly contentious rules.”

Furthermore, the midnight regulations may prove very difficult to reverse, which is just what the White House intended:

Last May, White House chief of staff Joshua Bolten instructed federal agency heads to make sure any new regulations were finalized by Nov. 1. The memo didn’t spell it out, but the thinking behind the directive was obvious. . … President Clinton finalized regulations within 60 days of the 2001 inauguration, meaning Bush could come in and easily reverse them. It could take Obama years to undo climate rules finalized more than 60 days before he takes office — the advantage the White House sought by getting them done by Nov. 1.

According to a recent study by the conservative Mercatus Center, “If Bush continues at this pace — an average of a major regulation a day from Nov. 1 to Nov. 20 he’ll produce ore last-minute rules than any other president.”

Fratto also claimed the Bush administration’s rule-making process is a “stark break” from the days of regulations being implemented “with inadequate public notice or interagency review.” But the Interior Department’s recent rule allowing uranium mining next to the Grand Canyon, for example, occurred after only 15 days of public comment, less than half the normal period.

A Philadelphia Inquirer profile of EPA Administrator Stephen Johnson this weekend reveals that the chief steward of our environmental protection is unwilling — or unable — to separate religion from science. The Wonk Room’s Brad Johnson notes that, when questioned by reporters, Stephen Johnson admitted he does not see a “clean-cut division” between the two:

It’s not a clean-cut division. If you have studied at all creationism vs. evolution, there’s theistic or God-controlled evolution and there’s variations on all those themes.

Johnson’s approach at EPA has been marked by putting his faith in corporate polluters. This past summer, Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse (D-RI) called on him to resign. Read more at the Wonk Room.

On Nov. 14, Bill O’Reilly and former House Speaker Newt Gingirch cited very limited incidents of thuggery by those protesting Proposition 8. Though the demonstrations — such as throwing leaflets in a church — were in no way the “violence” or “really nasty stuff” they decried, Gingrich declared the protests evidence of “a gay and secular fascism in this country that wants to impose its will on the rest of us.”

New Yorker writer and editor Hendrik Hertzberg cited Gingrich’s comments in his Dec. 1 “Comment” as an example of “anti-gay bigotry [that] is likely to get thicker and more toxic as it dries up.” He added, “This sort of sludge may or may not prove to be of some slight utility in the 2012 Republican primaries, but it is, increasingly, history.”

After O’Reilly sent producers to accost Hertzberg on the street — while lying about inviting him to appear on the show — Gingrich also piled on the New Yorker writer, calling him “a total jerk” to Politico:

I thought the fact that O’Reilly played unedited the entire walking interview with Hertzberg—who is a total jerk—was just funny. If you go back and look at what I said, it was a very narrowly focused reference to people who were invading churches and in one case surrounding a 65-year-old person and harassing her about wearing a cross. Now, in my judgment, people who do that are fascists. And whether they are fascists on the right or fascists on the left, they’re fascists, because they believe in imposing their views on you, outside the law, or they believe in using the law to force you to change who you are. And I’m opposed to fascism of any kind.

Gingrich’s condemnation of “a gay and secular facism” that “is prepared to use violence” was hardly targeted. Jumping off only the most minimal prompt by O’Reilly, who cited protesters “getting out of control very few days after the election,” Gingrich painted the entire anti-Prop 8 and pro-gay marriage movements with one single “fascist” brush.

It’s ironic, moreover, that Gingrich is upset at those “using the law to force you to change who you are.” Yet Gingrich seems to have no objection to anti-gay laws that prohibit people from adopting or marrying solely because of who they are.

Writing on his New Yorker blog about the O’Reilly attack, Hertzberg defended his original column: “I don’t think it was at all unreasonable for me to infer that the targets of Mr. Gingrich’s ‘fascism’ remarks were the mainstream gay-rights movement in general and the opponents of Proposition 8 in particular.” Of course it wasn’t. Gingrich’s own half-sister — an out lesbian — told him to “stop being a hater.” “This is a movement of the people that you most fear. It’s a movement of progress,” she said.

Late last month, reports surfaced that the right-wing advocacy group Freedom’s Watch founded by Ari Fleischer and funded by Sheldon Adelson was downsizing. A spokesman would not say at that time if the group would continue to operate in the future. Today, however, the Washington Times reports that the organization will officially close its doors at the end of the month:

Multiple sources said the board of directors, which includes former White House spokesman Ari Fleischer and former Ambassador to Italy Mel Sembler, has decided to close down rather than just scale down post-election.

“There are no ifs or buts,” said a Republican operative close to the situation. “The board has made the decision to shut the doors.”

Freedom’s Watch touted itself as the conservative answer to MoveOn.org and boasted that it would spend nearly $200 million in this year’s election cycle. But in the end, the group spent around $30 million.